Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.Indd

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.Indd An Introduction to Systematic Theology Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.1 1 10/10/07 5:01:21 PM Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.2 2 10/10/07 5:01:21 PM An Introduction to Systematic Theology Prolegomena and the Doctrines of Revelation, Scripture, and God CO R NEL I U S Van Til S ECOND E DITION EDITED BY WILLIAM EDGAR R Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.3 3 10/10/07 5:01:22 PM © 1974 den Dulk Christian Foundation Introduction and annotations © 2007 William Edgar Text based on The Works of Cornelius Van Til CD-ROM (New York: Labels Army Co., 1997). Used by permission. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photo- copy, recording, or otherwise—except for brief quotations for the purpose of review or comment, without the prior permission of the publisher, P&R Publishing Com- pany, P.O. Box 817, Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865-0817. Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from the King James Version or from the American Standard Version. Page design by Lakeside Design Plus Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Van Til, Cornelius, 1895–1987 An introduction to systematic theology : prolegomena and the doctrines of revelation, scripture, and God / Cornelius Van Til ; edited by William Edgar.—2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN: 978-0-87552-789-5 (pbk.) 1. Theology, Doctrinal. I. Edgar, William, 1944– II. Title. BT75.3.V36 2007 230—dc22 2007018614 Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.4 4 10/10/07 5:01:23 PM CONTENTS Introduction by William Edgar 1 Preface 11 1. The Idea and Value of Systematic Theology 15 2. The Method of Systematic Theology 26 3. Christian Epistemology 56 4. Christian Epistemology: The Position of Charles Hodge 71 5. Christian Epistemology: The Positions of Herman Bavinck and Valentine Hepp 89 6. Christian-theistic Revelation 117 7. Present General Revelation about Nature 137 8. Present General Revelation about Man 154 9. Present General Revelation about God 176 10. Special Revelation 190 11. Scripture 223 12. The Inspiration of Scripture 241 13. The Incomprehensibility of God 260 14. The Apologetic Import of the Incomprehensibility of God 282 15. Innate and Acquired Knowledge of God 310 Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.5 5 10/10/07 5:01:23 PM C ON T EN ts 16. The Names and Incommunicable Attributes of God 319 17. The Triunity of God 348 18. The Communicable Attributes of God 369 Index 399 i Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.6 6 10/10/07 5:01:24 PM INTRODUctiON BY WILLIAM Edgar he main title of this volume, An Introduction to Systematic Theol- ogy, could give the wrong impression. That is why a subtitle has been added in this edition. For this is not a survey of systematic Ttheology, but an introduction, in the sense of a foundation, a theological and philosophical underpinning. Thus, unlike Louis Berkhof’s Introduc- tion to Systematic Theology or Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics, this book is limited to what was called, in the older terminology, the pro- legomena. As such, it covers the nature and method of systematic the- ology, the question of knowledge (epistemology), and revelation, both general and special. But unlike most prolegomena the book does venture into theology proper, or the doctrine of God. The reason for this selec- tion, clearly, is that Cornelius Van Til is concerned first and foremost for apologetics, the defense of the faith. He says it himself in the preface to the 1971 edition of the work (originally penned in 1936): “The present syllabus has an apologetic intent running through it”; to which he adds that these days, in order to generate Reformed theology, apologetics is a necessary undergird- ing. That is especially the case since apologetics of the right kind can help wrench us out of our man-centered outlook. In Van Til’s view, Im- manuel Kant has so defined the contemporary playing field that both philosophy and theology have been controlled by his method ever since. The essence of Kant’s approach, as Van Til points out, is to make the human being, not God, the final reference point in all predication. That is to say, if we are to make sense out of anything, the presuppo- sition for assigning meaning and value to all of reality is human au- tonomy. Kant is a watershed figure because of his bold achievement, Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.1 1 10/10/07 5:01:25 PM I N tr O D U cti ON the “Copernican revolution” of thought. Instead of reality coming to us already defined from the outside, we define reality from inside our heads. Or, to bring it more up-to-date, describing a post-Marxist ap- proach, Van Til cites as an example of such autonomy what Colling- wood calls historical consciousness, which has become the agreed basis for our method of thinking. There is nothing new in centering predication and knowledge on the human being, of course. So Kant is not radically new. Still, he repre- sents a sea-change because of the degree to which his commitment to rationalism has influenced the succeeding generations. His work would eventually spell the death of metaphysics in most of the leading Western philosophies. Metaphysics pursues questions about being (ontology) and the universe (cosmology). Placing them in an absolute realm beyond science, Kant intended to protect them from rational assault. The effect, however, was that they eventually lost their relevance. Nietzsche famously pointed out that Kant’s unknowable absolute world is not consoling, redeeming, or obligating, and is therefore useless. At present there seems no end to the permutations stemming from anti- metaphysical views. Nietzsche’s descendants cynically reduce knowl- edge to power. The varieties of hermeneutical philosophies informally known as “postmodern” are an attempt to find some sort of meaning when “metanarratives” can no longer be believed. Heidegger suggested rediscovering being through poetry. Instead of knowing objective truth, however, what we have is Dasein, or being-in-the-world, including hu- man consciousness. Our principal task should be the hermeneutics of Dasein. Heidegger indirectly engendered various post-structuralist think- ers, such as Derrida, Foucault, and Kristeva. For them, there is no ultimate meaning, only this-worldly preoccupations. Derrida, for example, rejects any nostalgia for being, and deconstructs any attempts at reintroducing humanism, yet goes on to suggest that we find our identity in language. Thus, for many of those thinkers, traditional meaning is devastated, and we are left only with the fragments, as though one had decided to shatter a beautiful vase and look for its qualities in some of the chips. Certain theologians have attempted to enter into an alliance with these kinds of post-Kantian views, affirming the possibility of a Christian faith untainted by metaphysics and rational pretensions. They make bold at- tempts to identify the risk of faith with models such as dialectics or post- modernism. The Roman Catholic philosopher Giani Vattimo suggests we embrace a “non-religious Christianity,” which is free from the preten- sions of philosophy that seeks to understand reality in purely rational Van Til, Intro to Syst Theology.2 2 10/10/07 5:01:26 PM I N tr O D U cti ON terms. He affirms that the positive aspect of the tragic march of human history is the revelation of the principle of humiliation, which centers in the incarnation of Christ, whose own humiliation led to the redemption of the world.1 Various post-evangelical Protestants espouse their own versions of these schools. Stanley Grenz was drawn to postmodern models advo- cating, as he did, a christological center and a “non-linear” outline for redemption, over against the older creation-fall-redemption ground mo- tive. The problem with such accommodations is that they are not able to relate the human creature with God the Creator in objective categories. Lacking a true theology of the Creator-creature relationship, they cannot assert the historical nature of the fall into sin from the state of integrity. And because of this they cannot fully appreciate the moral revolution that led to the fall, and so the problem in the human condition is not so much moral guilt as it is finitude, at least to some extent. As a result, redemption is not fully of God’s mercy, with a transition from wrath to grace in history, through Christ. Instead they must grope after divine lib- eration, turning revelation into a projection of the self, rather than seeing it as God’s merciful self-disclosure to fallen humanity. To offer an authentic alternative, Van Til makes the strongest plea, in the present volume and throughout his writings, for the right kind of connection between the Creator and the creature. At every turn, he sets forth the fully self-sufficient God of the universe. When God creates, the creature has meaning and significance only because of the Creator-creature distinction. This is not dualism, against which Van Til argues forcefully. Nor is it intellectualism, which relegates revelation to an abstract content quite distinct from the real world of the creation. The dualist and the intellectualist prize ideas over the real world. They look upward for meaning, but in abstraction from the revelation found in the flowers of the fields and the cattle on a thou- sand hills. Thinking to guard against providentialism, which claims to track the hand of God in all the events of history, dualists erect a wall between the supernatural and the natural.
Recommended publications
  • Machen on Barth: Introduction to a Recently Uncovered Paper*
    ι WTJ53 (1991) 189-196 MACHEN ON BARTH: INTRODUCTION TO A RECENTLY UNCOVERED PAPER* D. G. HART N December 2,1929, W. L. Savage of Scribner's publishing house sent OJ. Gresham Machen a copy of Emil Brunner's recently released The Theology of Crisis and asked for some advice on marketing the book. Though Machen had already in the minds of many established his reputation as a cantankerous fundamentalist when he left Princeton for Westminster Sem­ inary, he was still a natural resource for the publisher's request. Machen himself was well acquainted with New York publishers since all of his books to that time had been published with MacMillan, and his newest, The Virgin Birth of Christ, was ready to go to press at Harper and Brothers. More importantly, Machen had heard Brunner lecture the previous year when the Swiss theologian visited Princeton. On that occasion Brunner had ex­ pressed "a special desire" to meet Machen. And according to Douglas Horton, the man responsible for the first English translation of Karl Barth, Brunner spoke of Machen's work "in the highest terms." Furthermore, some at Scribner's probably thought a positive evaluation of Brunner and Barth from Machen, one of the leading spokesmen for conservative Prot­ estantism, would boost sales among fundamentalists. Machen, however, in what became his typical response to inquiries about neoorthodoxy, said that he did not think the theology of crisis was a return to evangelical Chris­ tianity, but his limited knowledge made final judgment difficult. So for a fuller assessment Machen referred the Scribner's executive to Cornelius Van Til, Westminster's newly appointed professor of apologetics who even­ tually became one of America's most outspoken foes of Barthianism.1 * [Editor's note: Among the materials preserved in the Machen Archives, under the super­ vision of Grace Mullen, a previously unpublished paper by J.
    [Show full text]
  • Where Person Meets Word Part 1: Personalism in the Language
    WTJ 77 (2015): 355–77 WHERE PERSON MEETS WORD PART 1: PERSONALISM IN THE LANGUAGE THEORY OF KENNETH L. PIKE Pierce Taylor Hibbs I. Introduction eformed theology has always championed the Trinity as the beating heart of the Christian faith. This is true not just of the mainstay his- torical Reformers, Luther and Calvin, but also of Dutch Calvinism, Old R 1 Princeton, and the Westminster heritage. Certainly, Calvin and Melanchthon were not alone in claiming that “God’s triunity was that which distinguished the true and living God from idols.”2 The true God is the Trinity. Out of this tradition emerged Cornelius Van Til and his insistence that the self-contained ontological Trinity be the basis of all human experience and knowledge.3 He claimed that “if we are to have coherence in our experience, Pierce Hibbs currently serves as the Assistant Director of the Center for Theological Writing at Westminster Theological Seminary. 1 On Luther, see David Lumpp, “Returning to Wittenberg: What Martin Luther Teaches Today’s Theologians on the Holy Trinity,” CTQ 67 (2003): 232, 233–34; and Mickey Mattox, “From Faith to the Text and Back Again: Martin Luther on the Trinity in the Old Testament,” ProEccl 15 (2006): 292. On Calvin, see T. F. Torrance, “Calvin’s Doctrine of the Trinity,” CTJ 25 (1990): 166. For an example of the Dutch Calvinist view, see Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003–2008), 2:279, 329. For Old Princeton, see Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2013), 1:442; and B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Function of Perichoresis and the Divine Incomprehensibility
    Wrj 64 (2002) 289-306 THE FUNCTION OF PERICHORESIS AND THE DIVINE INCOMPREHENSIBILITY LANE G. TIPTON I. Introduction Reformed Trinitarian theism best encapsulates the theology of Cornelius Van Til. He says, "Basic to all the doctrines of Christian theism is that of the self-contained God, or, if we wish, that of the ontological Trinity. It is this notion of the ontological Trinity that ultimately controls a truly Christian methodology."1 Again, "unless we may hold to the presupposition of the self- contained ontological Trinity, human rationality itself is a mirage."2 The onto- logical Trinity provides the architectonic principle in Van Til's theology and apologetic. However, the doctrine of the Trinity in Van Til's thought is as controversial as it is foundational. Regarding the Trinity, Van Til makes the following state- ments, which, when taken together, provide a formulation which John Frame called "a very bold theological move."3 What is this bold move? Van Til argues: It is sometimes asserted that we can prove to men that we are not assuming anything that they ought to consider irrational, inasmuch as we say that God is one in essence and three in person. We therefore claim that we have not asserted unity and trinity of exactly the same thing. Yet this is not the whole truth of the matter. We do assert that God, that is, the whole Godhead, is one person.4 Notice that Van Til does not assert that the person/essence formulation is false, or in need of replacement; instead, he argues that the statement "God is one in essence and three in person" does not yield the "whole truth of the matter." Again Van Til says, "We must hold that God's being holds an absolute numeri- cal identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Pious and Critical Scholarly Paradigms of the Pentateuch •Fl
    Author Biography Spencer is a third year History major from Martinez, California. In addition, he is perusing a minor in Religious Studies. His major research interests involve the study of the Old and New Testament, as well as military history. After graduation, he hopes to take his passion and research to seminary, where he can further his study of the field and history of Biblical criticism. Morgan Pious and Critical Scholarly Paradigms of the Pentateuch — during the 19th & early 20th centuries by Spencer Morgan Abstract This paper examines the antithesis between Christian scholarship and modern higher criticism of the Pentateuch during the 19th and early 20th centuries. During the 19th century, the popularization and eventual hegemony of the Doc- umentary Hypothesis revolutionized the field of Biblical studies. Modern criti- cal scholars claimed that Moses did not write the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) during the 15th century BC, but rather it was the product of a later redaction of at least four separate documents: J, E, P, and D. Writing hundreds of years apart and long after Moses, their authors reflect not the ancient covenantal religion of Moses, but rather various periods in the evolution of Israel’s religion. The implications of the Documentary Hypothe- sis bring into question the historicity and theological validity of not only the Pen- tateuch, but also the Christian New Testament which presupposes it. The goal of this research is to identify the foundational presuppositions, conclusions, and contextual consciousness that both the modern critics and the Reformed body of Christian scholars opposing them brought to their scholarship.
    [Show full text]
  • Extending the Knowledge of the Glory
    “Extending the knowledge of the glory of God in Christ until that knowledge covers the earth as the waters cover the sea” from Westminster’s Mission Statement From the President Philadelphia Campus Mailing address: I am delighted to introduce you to Westminster P.O. Box 27009 Theological Seminary! I trust that the following Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19118 pages will provide the information you need to Street address: consider thoughtfully and prayerfully if God would 2960 West Church Road have you study here at Westminster. Glenside, Pennsylvania 19038 We are a thriving community of professors and (215) 887-5511 students seeking to understand the meaning of Scripture and to apply it to all areas of life. (800) 373-0119 That’s why we have three emphases. First, we Fax (215) 887-5404 believe that Reformed theology, as defined by the www.wts.edu Westminster Standards, most accurately represents the teachings of Scripture; therefore, we are unashamedly committed to historic, Extension Campus and Programs of Study Reformed Christianity. Second, proper interpretation of Scripture requires careful Texas Campus scholarship; therefore, we are solidly committed to academic excellence. Third, genuine and effective gospel service requires a heart of love and devotion to Christ; Two Turtle Creek Building therefore, we are deeply committed to spiritual formation. 3838 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 200 With these emphases at the core, we offer a variety of degree programs to train Dallas, Texas 75219 men for ordained ministry and men and women for gospel service. Our graduates (214) 528-8600 serve all over the world as pastors, professors, missionaries, counselors, doctors, Fax (214) 373-0907 translators, writers, church planters, and in many other capacities.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analytical Presentation of Cornelius Van Til's Transcendental
    An Analytical Presentation of Cornelius Van Til’s Transcendental Argument from Predication By Robin Barrett May 12, 2017 Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1 Defending the Methodology ..........................................................................................................2 The Transcendental Argument ...................................................................................................13 The Nature of a Transcendental Argument ........................................................................14 Presenting an Analytical Formulation of Van Til’s Transcendental Argument from Predication .........................................................................................................................18 Supporting and Defending the Transcendental Argument ......................................................24 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................35 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................38 ii Introduction This present author intends to examine the apologetic method and arguments of Cornelius Van Til from within an analytical framework. The purpose of such an endeavor is to subject Van Til’s arguments to an analytical critique to understand if they can withstand such a critique.
    [Show full text]
  • The Old Princeton Apologetics: Common Sense Or Reformed?
    JETS 46/4 (December 2003) 647–72 THE OLD PRINCETON APOLOGETICS: COMMON SENSE OR REFORMED? tim mcconnel* At its founding, Princeton Theological Seminary was given the specific apologetical task of equipping its students to combat the deistic errors of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment. This played a significant role in the development of its apologetics, as it tended to take over the argumentation of previous apologists who had attempted the same task, without regard to whether they were Reformed or not. Thus, Bishop Butler’s eighteenth-century work, The Analogy of Religion Natural and Revealed, became a standard ref- erence work for apologetics classes, in spite of the fact that Butler had repu- diated his strict Calvinistic Presbyterian upbringing to embrace a moderate Anglicanism.1 While apologetics was a significant concern, it was certainly not the sole focus of the major Princetonian theologians. Archibald Alexander, the found- ing professor of Princeton, taught both didactic and polemical theology. Charles Hodge began his academic career as an exegete of Scripture, and later moved to systematic theology, for which he is better known.2 His son Archibald Alexander Hodge replaced him in the chair of didactic and polemic theology, and he in turn was replaced by Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield. None of these noted professors served explicitly in the chair of apologetics, which was only created in the later part of the nineteenth century. However, Warfield, a prolific writer, frequently addressed apologetical themes in his writings. A later, lesser known Princetonian, William Brenton Greene, Jr., occupied the Stuart Professorship of Apologetics and Christian Ethics from * Tim McConnel is assistant professor of theology at Dordt College, 498 4th Avenue NE, Sioux Center, IA 51250.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Ordained Servant: Subject Index, Vol. 1-14 ABORTION “Moving Beyond ‘Pro-Life’.” (Douglas Wilson & Douglas Jones) 6:2 (Apr. 1997): 37-39. “Some Thoughts on the Abortion Issue.” (G. I. Williamson) 4:1 (Jan. 1995): 6-8. ACCOUNTABILITY “Thoughtful Accountability.” (Jack Sawyer) 12:3 (Jul. 2003): 52-53. ADDICTION “Addictions.” (M. Van Liuk) 11:4 (Oct. 2002): 67-72. ADULTERY “Access Denied.” (Richard Ganz) 10:1 (Jan. 2001): 18-19. “Biblical Godliness: A Response to Williamson and Ganz on Qualifications for Office.” (Matthew W. Kingsbury) 10:2 (Apr. 2001): 24-26. “Have We Gone Too Far?” (G. I. Williamson) 10:1 (Jan. 2001): 17. APOLOGETICS “A Letter from Cornelius Van Til to Francis Schaeffer.” (Cornelius Van Til) 6:4 (Oct. 1997): 77-80. “The Post-Modern Paradigm Shift and the Biblical, Reformed Presuppositionalism of Van Til.” (Larry E. Ball) 5:4 (Oct. 1996): 87-90. ARMINIANISM “Arminianism, Calvinism and Hyper-Calvinism” (Brenton Ferry) 10:3 (Jul. 2001): 59. ATONEMENT “Unlimited Atonement.” (G. I. Williamson) 4:3 (Jul. 1995): 71-72. BIBLE TRANSLATIONS AND VERSIONS “Paul, the Apostle of Gender-Inclusive Translation?” (James W. Scott) 10:1 (Jan. 2001): 20-22. “Should We Still Use The KJV Today: A Review Article.” (G. I. Williamson) 6:4 (Oct. 1997): 99. BIBLICAL LANGUAGES “Help in Using the Original Languages in Preaching.” (Jay E. Adams) 3:1 (Jan. 1994): 23. BIBLICAL THEOLOGY “Biblical Theology and the Session – Part 1: Redemptive History and the Church’s Confession of Faith.” (James S. Gidley) 9:2 (Apr. 2000): 35-38. “Biblical Theology and the Session – Part 2: Redemptive History and the Church Discipline.” (James S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ronald T. Clutter, "The Reorganization of Princeton
    Grace Theological Journal 7.2 (1986) 179- 201 THE REORGANIZATION OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY RECONSIDERED RONALD T. CLUTTER The reorganization of Princeton Theological Seminary, leading to the withdrawal of J. Gresham Machen, Oswald T. Allis, Cornelius Van Til, and Robert Dick Wilson, is identified often as a triumph of modernism in its conflict with fundamentalism in the churches in the 1920s. However, a consideration of the situation at Princeton and of the events which took place within and outside the institution leads to a different conclusion. The controversy at Princeton involved evangelical Presbyterians, all claiming loyalty to the tradition of the seminary. The conflict arose due to competing philosophies of seminary education and differing solutions for dealing with liberalism in the denomination. In this confrontation, pitting one evangelical faction against another, Prince­ ton Seminary suffered privately and publicly. The denomination was called upon to assist in resolving the problem. The solution enacted by the denomination resulted in the departure from the seminary ofsome of the most capable defenders of the evangelicalfaith. * * * INTRODUCTION T the centennial celebration of Princeton Theological Seminary in A 1912, institution president, Francis Landey Patton, declared that "the theological position of Princeton Seminary has remained un­ changed.'" At the sesquicentennial celebration, H~gh T. Kerr stated: "It is no secret that many contemporary professors at the seminary feel completely out of touch theologically with their predecessors of a generation or more ago on such issues as Biblical criticism, apolo­ getics, the sacraments, and the interpretation of the Westminster IFrancis Landey Patton. "Princeton Seminary and the Faith," in The Centennial Celebration of the Theological Seminary of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (n.p., n.d.) 354.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Philosophy and Christian Thought
    1 2ST504, History of Philosophy and Christian Thought Course Handbook RTS/Orlando, Spring Term, 2017 Meetings Wednesdays, 8-12 AM, with break for Chapel from 10-11 AM. Instructor John M. Frame My stated office hours this term are Thursdays, 8-11 AM, others by appointment. I’m in my office most mornings, and if my door is ajar I’ll be happy to see you. Feel free to write me at [email protected]. I will probably give a better answer to your question by email than in person, but I realize that sometimes face-to-face meetings are better. Teaching Assistant Aaron Opgenorth, [email protected], is also available to help you. He will be evaluating your written assignments and will be available to help you prepare for exams. Objectives 1. To inform students about the main thinkers in the history of philosophy, Reformed theology, and liberal theology. 2. To show the interaction of philosophy and theology, especially the influence of philosophy on our theological formulations. 3. To illumine the spiritual warfare that takes place in the intellectual movements of human history. 4. To give students critical tools to evaluate, not only thinkers of past history, but future thinkers as well. Assignments 1. Regular attendance, preparation of assigned material each day for discussion. This year I will be using my new book A History of Western 2 Philosophy and Theology (P&R Publishers, 2015). With each chapter, you should be prepared to define the Key Terms at the end and answer the Study Questions. 2. One paper of roughly 3000 words, due Fri., May 19, at 11 AM.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Grace*
    COMMON GRACE* CORNELIUS VAN TIL ^THIE question of where he may find a point of contact -*- with the world for the message that he brings is a matter of grave concern to every Christian minister and teacher. The doctrine of common grace seeks, in some measure at least, to supply this answer. But to give the answer desired the concept of common grace must be set in its proper theo­ logical context. In discussing the problem, the present paper accordingly deals with (I) the Christian philosophy of history of which the common grace doctrine is a part, (II) the most comprehensive modern statement of this problem, (III) the salient features of the recent debate on the subject, and (IV) some suggestions for further study. I. THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY The common grace1 problem may quite properly be con­ sidered as being a part or aspect of the problem of the philos­ ophy of history. Dr. K. Schilder speaks of Abraham Kuyper's great three volume work on "Common Grace'' as an epic. And an epic it truly is. In setting forth his views on common grace Kuyper envelops the whole course of human culture in his field of vision. Common grace is said to be in large measure responsible for making history as a whole what it * This article is based upon a paper which was read before The Calvin- istic Philosophy Club at its Autumn, 1941 meeting in Philadelphia, and which appeared in mimeographed form in the Proceedings of the Club for that year. In view of the great interest in the subject, the paper has been revised and condensed for publication in this Journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Kuyper and Bavinck on Natural Theology Richard A
    Bavinck Review 10 (2019): 5–35 Kuyper and Bavinck on Natural Theology Richard A. Muller Introduction Recent scholarship on the theologies of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck has reminded us that the Dutch Reformed tradition, as it emerged into the twentieth century, provided extensive theological analyses of revelation,1 theological epistemology,2 and the relationship of theology to philosophy 3 that offer significantly different understandings of these issues from what can be elicited from the trajectories of Ritschlian and neo-orthodox theology.4 An issue that remains to be examined in further detail is the stance of Kuyper and Bavinck on natural theology, if only 1 See James Eglinton, Trinity and Organism: Towards a New Reading of Herman Bavinck’s Organic Motif (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2012), 131–54; Jan Veenhof, “Revela- tion and Grace in Herman Bavinck,” in The Kuyper Center Review, vol. 2, Revelation and Common Grace (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 3–13; and Robert S. Covolo, “Beyond the Schleiermacher-Barth Dilemma: General Revelation, Bavinckian Consensus, and the Future of Reformed Theology,”Bavinck Review 3 (2012): 30 –59; Henk van den Belt, “Religion as Revelation? The Development of Herman Bavinck’s View from a Reformed Orthodox to a Neo-Calvinist Approach,” Bavinck Review 4 (2013): 9–31; also note the analysis of Bavinck’s approach to natural knowledge in Steven J. Duby, “Working with the Grain of Nature: Epistemic Underpinnings for Christian Witness in the Theology of Herman Bavinck,” Bavinck Review 2 (2012): 60 –84. My thanks to David Sytsma for his careful reading and helpful suggestions. 2 Arvin Vos, “Knowledge According to Bavinck and Aquinas,” 2 parts, Bavinck Review 6 (2015): 9–36; Bavinck Review 7 (2016): 8–62; and David S.
    [Show full text]